Obscene/obscenity

[spazlabz]

Hi all,
I was wondering, since I have some pretty strong opinions on this subject, what others in the biz thought. By now everyone has heard what is going down with extreme assc's. And as you probably already know, John Ashcroft is touting how this is just the beginning. He is starting his own little war on obscenity.
Personally, I feel like he is doing this because the 04 elections are right around the corner, and the extreme right needs it's pound of flesh.
I won't comment on the content of the Extreme Assc's film's, it's irrelevant now, they are being prosecuted. But some of the content that I feel may be in the targets (after they get this conviction, IF they get one) is;
1)Scat
2)Beasty
(these two are already, almost universally considered a no no, but the content is still out there if you want to see it)
3)waterworks (pissing content)
4)Fisting
5)rape (simulated or not, even with a disclaimer)
6)Cum baths
I am sure that there are more, these are just off the top of my head. But I use a very subjective set of criteria when compiling this short list. It is as fallows:
What do I think a middle class housewife would turn her head away from? What would she consider distasteful?
The reason I use this standard is because they are going to be prosecuting these cases using an outdated 'Community Standards' clause to make their money.
Personally I think if it is legal (meaning there is not a law preventing it,i.e. child porn) then you, and me, and anyone who can should be able to try and make money with it. Consumers vote with their wallets. If they want to see what modern community standards are, look at which types of sites are making the cash. People, maybe not yours truly, WANT access to this content, they are willing to pay for it, if a teen (18+) is getting soaked in cum by 6 guys with mixed racial backgrounds, and that sight is making some guy a gadzillionaire, guess what, the community wants it.
It is MY opnion that the far right conservatives detest the fact that sinners (such as myself) are having a blast and making green. Lots and Lots of money (i'm a sinner, not lots and lots of money LOL). They want the money for themselves. I hate to throw down anything from the bible, but you cant be a slave to two masters, you love one and detest the other. So my question to the religeous extremists is as fallows;
Which do you love? God or money?

Nevermind, the original intent of this was to ask, what type of content do you think they will go after next? What boudaries are they going to try and force on the free market and free internet next? I said what I thought and why, lets see what other people think.

spaz

I think this thing was simple before the Internet. Because if you were sell videos of people defecating on each other and eating it, your local community should be able to say STOP IT we do not like it.

Now with the Internet what is the local standard, is it those in the local vicinity or surfers? Then you have to look at the cross section of the people viewing the site on the net, how easy is it to “Stumble” upon the site and how easy is it to see the pictures or see what they are selling? Remember a lot of these sites Spam anywhere and include Beta Tags that can bring kids to a site.

However the fact that 1% buys, is not going to make it acceptable to the other 99% and here is the crux of 'Community Standards'. Yes people do have a right to say because 90% of us find this distasteful you cannot sell it. That is democracy. Or are you saying if anyone wants to buy it and it does not include children it is acceptable? That is anarchy.

You cannot have a system where anyone can put up any type of content, excluding children, and say this is freedom. The best judges are a jury of 12 local people across the board to make their own decision on what is and is not acceptable. It is by no means a perfect answer, but come up with a better one before you shoot it down.

If you live in an area where porn is not accepted and want to open a porn business, move.

[spazlabz]

Or are you saying if anyone wants to buy it and it does not include children it is acceptable? That is anarchy.

Nope, not saying that at all. Since you bring it up, I would say applying a Community Standard to the internet is an exercise in the ridiculous. Anyone anywhere that thinks that they know what the internet community standards are only kidding themselves. Parental controls are in place, and there are laws that clearly state what is not acceptable...... on any media. Be it in video tapes/disc, in print (magazines) or on the net. I use child porn as an example because it is clearly indefensible, it is illegal, and if you peddle in that content your going to jail. It is a very cut and dry issue. No one will argue about it. But when you start to apply a purely subjective standard like 'Community Standards', you cross a line from enforcing the law of the land (which should reflect community standards already) to plain and simple censorship.
The problem for me is that once you start applying this entirely subjective community standard idea, you run a high risk of having a minority set the standards.
I could give a shit less about recycling. But some people are passionate about it. I mean downright zealots. I make no judgment on them, just point out the contrast between their views and mine. Those people form groups, lobby their local govt, are vocal (we're killing mother earth!). Now, if I sit on my couch (which I do) and they go about making sweeping social changes in regards to trash, well, what can I say? Not a damned thing.
So who is passionate about porn? Surfers? I don't think so. It's the Christian Coalition and their ilk that are proactive about it. I know no one, except those that make our money from it, that would energetically defend our right to create and sell porn. This is a dangerous slope, and we are only at the top of the hill. No one knows what kind of grade we are facing till we are well under way and being pulled to the bottom.
I am saying what I think they may target next. Based solely on a minority's opinion that all porn is bad. The teen example I gave before, how much of a stretch do you think it would take to link that perfectly legal content to child porn? And imagine the un-net savvy 12 who could be potentially sitting in that jury box.


spaz

[urb]

I hate it when I get porno email spam.

Coz if I'm getting it, then I guess about 1-2 million people are also getting it.

Unsolicited email like that is adding fuel to the fire. |skull|

If there is ever a porn witch-hunt, then I would imagine that everyone will be tarred with the same brush.

So you told us what you don't like.

Now tell us how you would control what people put out or are you saying there should be no controls other than the "Laws of the land"? Because the law of the land says it's obscene if it is judged to be obscene by the local community.

This is a difficult line to draw and is always on the move, what was acceptable 20 years ago is tame now. But don't worry about your income, it is not going to go down by a tightening of the rules. The same number of people will be surfing and jerking off if you do not give them Skat and Rape sites.

And having them on the net is nothing about freedom, it's about a few people with limited porn skills trying to make money in the business. We have never produced anything like that and probably make a lot more money than most.

And by having the more obscene niches on the net we make ourselves easy targets for Ashcroft and his cronies, we are actually playing into his hands and putting at risk the main stream porn sites.

Plus Visa?MC might just say, NO to all adult internet.

So here's a question. Skat, Rape, Incest, Beasty, Pissing, etc and no Vias?MC plus trouble from Ashcroft. Or mainstream porn, with Visa?MC and no trouble from Ashcroft?

This is the real world, so you make the choice what option do you want, Freedom with no income or restrictions with an income?

To bring something down you have to replace it with something. Replacing it with nothing is dangerous.

[Cleo]

I find John Ashcroft obscene along with the current regime and their religious bible thumping views.

Other then that I could care less what two consenting adults what to do to each other or view.

[Greenguy]

A little old (last year I think) but this seems to be the rule of thumb these days:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontl...g/cambria.html

[docholly]

No black men-white women themes

guess spike and I can't be on the cover of Club? DAYAM!!!

*****************************************

actually the supreme court threw this back to the lower courts a few months ago.. i think in Philadelphia, actually, on the definition of what is obscene. Certainly what applies in one community, say NYC or LA, wouldn't apply in Montgomery Alabama or Decatur Indiana etc.

So where does the definition come from? Does it apply to the Lowest standard, re NY/Las Vegas/LA or the highest from the bible thumpers?

Hopefully our court system will be able to delay this long enough for us to get a new president..

meanwhile, as stated in the old forum, i think we all need to be aware of what is out there.. and what could possibly be coming our way.

[Fisty Palmer]

The simple solution is not to vote Republican in 2004.

I agree with Cleo's sentiments regarding Ashcroft. This is a very scary man -- a fanatic even -- who is single-handedly attempting to remove our precious civil liberties, and first amendment rights.

Like the fight against Acacia, adult webmasters need to band together and rally to vote these people out of office.

[Surfn]

Having been around a while and seeing many presidents and politicians come and go, I view this as the latest incarnation of the same old promise to rid the land of this or that, only to mysteriously disappear when elections are over.

I don’t know if any here remember but here in South Bend (which includes the greater Michiana area) a few years ago when we had a mayor that was going to rid this (mid size community of just over 1,000,000) area of prostitution and porn. The case went to the Supreme Court and Oprah interviewed him a few times. Nothing changed. We have that same amount of everything we had before, they just relocated a couple blocks away…|rasta|

[urb]

I think that there's nothing we can do about what governments do these days.

And there's nothing governments can do about what people do these days.

I can only look to history to see an example....... alcohol was once banned in the USA and people still got drunk.

[Fisty Palmer]

Originally posted by Surfn
Having been around a while and seeing many presidents and politicians come and go, I view this as the latest incarnation of the same old promise to rid the land of this or that, only to mysteriously disappear when elections are over.

I think Ashcroft is different. He falls into a category of people I like to call "the rulemakers."

People with this perspective love to make rules for everyone else to live by, and they will aggressively enforce what is "right" in the world based on their own limited perceptions.

Many of the "bible-thumpers" fall into this category.

These people are very rigid in their thinking, and extremely intolerant of free-thinkers, or groups that advocate anything out of the norm.

Bottomline: rulemakers are not driven as much by political agenda. In other words, Ashcroft passionately believes in what he's doing, and I doubt he'll back away until he's either kicked out of office, or Bush tells him to cool it.

[Surfn]

Originally posted by Fisty Palmer
I think Ashcroft is different. He falls into a category of people I like to call "the rulemakers."

People with this perspective love to make rules for everyone else to live by, and they will aggressively enforce what is "right" in the world based on their own limited perceptions.

Many of the "bible-thumpers" fall into this category.

These people are very rigid in their thinking, and extremely intolerant of free-thinkers, or groups that advocate anything out of the norm.

Bottomline: rulemakers are not driven as much by political agenda. In other words, Ashcroft passionately believes in what he's doing, and I doubt he'll back away unless he's either kicked out of office, or Bush tells him to cool it.

Ask Larry Flynt about his experiences with the groups you just mentioned.

[Fisty Palmer]

Originally posted by Surfn
Ask Larry Flynt about his experiences with the groups you just mentioned.

Yep...Jerry Falwell definitely falls into the category of "rulemakers."

[Cleo]

Personally I think people like Jerry Falwell should be tried for crimes against society for preaching his superstitious non tolerant views.

Who the fuck gave him the right to judge anybody? I have yet to hear from any omnipotent beings that he has been given any divine right of judgment.

Ashcroft should go back to worrying about tits on statues and get out of politics.

If it wasn't for the power that these people have and the hardship they cause it would be comical.

Unfortunately Cleo we live in the real world and Ashcroft and Falwell are not the only thing to consider, now ther eis Visa and what they will allow.

It will not cost us any business to work within the guidlines, except those who do not know how to comply.

[Cleo]

Depends on who's real world you choose to live in. Personally I find the world of people like Ashcroft and Falwell much too small for me to live in so I choose to live in my world.

[Surfn]

Originally posted by Cleo
Depends on who's real world you choose to live in. Personally I find the world of people like Ashcroft and Falwell much too small for me to live in so I choose to live in my world.

Ditto

[docholly]

Asscroft took his ques from Ed Meese in the 80's.

There will always be a market for paid sex.. it's not called the oldest profession for nothing...but those like Larry Flynt *may the goddess bless him*.. and to an extent the owners of Plato's retreat, brought what was once in the closet to the public.

Fanatics use whatever means necessary to scare those who are uneducated or uninformed.

If you think the war in Iraq is wrong..automatically you are un-american.

If you think the words "one nation, under god" have no place in the pledge, you are unamerican.

If you think that statues of the 10 commandments shouldn't be in a court house, you are a devil worshiper.

If you view pornography in the privacy of your home, in a cubicle in an adult vid store, in a titty bar, you are a pervert.

If your child is around someone who is gay, they will be molested.

none of which are true..but just ask someone who believes that.

I never understood the majority of the female mindset when it came to viewing porn. I certainly would much prefer my man, popping in a video and watching it with him, than him crusing a bar somewhere to get the real thing.

Yes we do need to vote and vote our personal conscience. But more than vote we need to ensure that others vote as well. In 2000 my husband and i were living in Atlanta but both registered in Florida. Neither one of us bothered to get an absentee ballot or drive the 6 1/2 hours necessary to vote. and every day he is still at sea, i kick myself for not investing the time necessary to do that one little act.

NEVER again.

[spazlabz]

Proudly, I am an Unamerican, devil worshiping pervert by their standards.
What I was originally trying to express is actually quite easy

It will not cost us any business to work within the guidelines

Those 'guidelines' are shrinking. THAT's the point. I do not desire to work outside the law, I do not wish to 'shock' or 'offend' I'm in this for the money. But in the 'real world' as it stands today, there is a large, organized, political force of non-thinking drones whose sole goal is to 'clean up' the internet, NAY! the WORLD! they slobber at the thought of each and everyone one of us going out of business. No matter how 'clean' your porn is.
Ashcroft covered the breasts of Lady Freedom. Cost taxpayers $8,000 of hard earned cash to do it to. Minuscule compared to the national debt. But it goes a looooooooooooooooooong way towards telling people EXACTLY where he stands on the issue of nudity..........forget about images/vids of sex. a statue makes this guy blush.
Yes, I have always, and will always try to be tasteful in how I present my work to the public. I will always fallow the guidelines set I have for myself personally. I won't violate or try to skirt the law. But the room we have to work in is getting smaller. And doing it rapidly. If Ashcroft is successful, the only sites that show consensual sex or even nudity will be located on overseas servers and those will be, by law, blocked in the US. Do I think he could ever be that successful? No, extremists of any kind won't prosper in the US, but he can make things difficult for all of us for at least another year.

just my ramblings
spaz

[laura99]

Vote for a Democrat.

[Linkster]

Having lived through many of the fights on obscenity and rulings I would just suggest that these politically/religious based fights will always be around....and wont change the world as we know it.

There will always be people who beat their chest and make threats to see if they can get a change without the fight...scare tactics that sometimes work and mostly dont. There will also always be those who forsee the end of the internet as we know it and they will be wringing their hands and crying Visa/MC when it has nothing to do with it...damn if I were a CC company and I saw that most of my chargebacks and assoc costs were from one group Id sure make it harder for that group to use my services.
But associating that with anything other than business and making money is pure bunk.

There is a large group of corporations (and we're talking huge like AT&T etc.) that make way too much off financing the industry, putting what the "real public" wants in hotel room pay per view boxes etc., to ever let a politician (who needs donations to run for office) get rid of our industry. Add to that the global presence of the web and you have a losing battle for the do-gooders.

There will be the isolated cases (I remember a content providor in the BBS days that shipped a CD interstate and got nailed based on the community standards he shipped it to) that are used as "examples" to try to get others worried and change their ways...just doesnt work though.

If I remember correctly there are still alot of little ribbons hanging on web pages from an earlier attempt to stifle the content of the web....

Don't let the people that sit back every day worrying about where the next "fall of the internet" is gonna come from ruin your biz....let them fail...there will always be plenty of replacements